quadratic acceleration factor
semi-empirical models,
global temperature curve
residual trend
process-based sea-level estimates
a 95th percentile value
range of 144 synthetic timeseries
abstract culminates
weighted global sea-level history
non-linear time evolution

Dear Poirot I wish the REAL scientist that you linked was not so verbose.

In a nutshell he said:
“This increase in the rate of sea-level rise is a logical consequence of global warming, since ice melts faster and heat penetrates faster into the oceans in a warmer climate.”

I buy that, its physics, aint it.

“Global sea level is projected to rise 8-23 cm (3-9 in) by 2030, relative to 2000 levels, 18-48 cm (7-19 in) by 2050, and 50–140 cm (20-55 in) by 2100”

Yet the mean in Sydney harbour has been 0.9mm over the past 90 years. In fact we just came through a 10 year period where it was half of that. By 2030 the max projection is 23cm….that’s 230mm.

We have 17 years until 2030 and at the current rate (if no anomalies like the half the average decade crop up) we will rack up 1.5mm. Poirot do you know the linear that 1.5mm is? It is less than the width of my thumb nail, I just measured it.

When is this deluge going to kick off? They have been calling it since 1980.

@Poirot,

1) << SPQR, Here's yer link.>>
2) <<Just want to add for SPQR's benefit that the term "thick mush" was probably overstating the scenario...yet it can't denied that it was significant melt in very quick time - an "extreme melt event".>>

Nice try mother hen
But I want the link that shows/says << It took just 48 hours to turn ice, kilometres thick, into mush>>

The whole “KILOMETRES THICK” ice sheet was turned to “mush”

Not “thawing at or near the surface”
Not surface “run-off”
BUT MUSH! (and not even “thick” mush!)

Which the dictionary defines as: 1. A thick porridge or pudding of cornmeal boiled in water or milk/ 2. Something thick, soft, and pulpy.

But I want the link that shows/says << It took just 48 hours to turn ice, kilometres thick, into mush>>
Crickey !
It even takes our Universities longer than that to turn bright young minds into wide-eyed, open-mouthed, disorientated Academics !

Sonofgloin, your post to me was a sign you surrender.
Why do we post? I think most of us want to first put our opinions, then see others, maybe learn on the way.
I think those who come post and read very little of others thoughts, are not getting the best from the site.
I also think to post as you did, is OK but do you think first then post?
That putting evidence on the table, that your views may not be shared by most is wrong?
You constantly inform arjay here in print, that he knows much more than most.
I have my doubts, I too do not believe a word you print on this subject.
So very many posters,like me, target the views and policy's of the Greens.
Yet post thoughts and ideas, as is their right, every bit as silly as theirs.
In matters of climate change you have it down to Pat.
Do you under stand?
Your rebuttal of my words, says you do not want me to post an opinion, yet you would execept no such view about your rights.

sonoggloin,

Here's an easy to digest and reasonably clear and concise round up of Australia's recent heat anomaly - food for thought:

http://theconversation.edu.au/whats-causing-australias-heat-wave-11628

Poirot, in real terms almost all we know comes from second and third parties. That is not an issue if the source is reliable. After the J curve hoax I have had little faith with numbers emanating from the Global Warming Industry.

But in first hand terms I know a ten year drought had the states building desal plants and the likes of Professor Flannery stating that the empty dams will never fill again. Prof Flannery declared sea level rise will imminently (in generational terms) devastate waterfront properties. Flannery then invests in waterfront property. The rains followed his purchase and filled our dams.

I consider the statement of fact that Dorothea included in her passionate sonnet:
“I love a sunburnt country,
A land of sweeping plains,
Of ragged mountain ranges,
Of droughts and flooding rains.”

A historical statement of meteorology from generations of observation. Here and right now I see no change in the pattern that Dorothea identified. Re the “record temperatures” as exampled in your link, here is an opposing link that casts doubt on the validity of the BOM.
http://joannenova.com.au/2012/03/australian-temperature-records-shoddy-inaccurate-unreliable-surprise/
What to believe and why to believe it is a value judgment we all make.
TBC